ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Vuescan was: RE: 24bit vs more



The big advantage to Vuescan for me is that it is far more aggressive in 
altering exposure
times than most scanner software. This can lead to rather extended scans, but 
it can also
get highlights out of thick negs that absolutely stump other programs. 
Polacolor in
particular is absolutely helpless when faced with anything resembling a thick 
highlight.
And, on a Mac at least, Polacolor's batch scanning is about as stable and 
reliable as a pit
bull on crack.



Austin Franklin wrote:

> Frank,
>
> > By low end scanners, do you mean something like the Polaroid SS4000?
> > Because VueScan produces much better scans than Polacolor Insight.
>
> Viewscan, nor Insight, nor any scanner software "produces" the scans, the
> scanner and the scanner operator does.  Perhaps it's true that for someone
> who wants the software to simply "hand" then a scan, Viewscan does a better
> job at automating the process.  I find setting setpoints and adjusting tonal
> curves quite easy.  Or, perhaps for scanners that aren't all that good, all
> the extra processing options in Viewscan can be very beneficial.
>
> Austin
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.